The Chicago Cubs find themselves in a fascinating position as the trade deadline looms, and it’s not just about the usual chatter of who’s going where. What’s particularly intriguing is the dilemma surrounding two of their young infielders: Matt Shaw and Pedro Ramírez. Both are talented, both are tradeable, but which one should the Cubs hold onto? This isn’t just a question of stats or pedigree—it’s about potential, fit, and the team’s long-term vision. Let’s dive in.
The Case for Matt Shaw
Matt Shaw is the kind of player who, on paper, checks a lot of boxes. Drafted in the first round in 2023, he’s the Cubs’ former top prospect, and his versatility is undeniable. Personally, I think his ability to play almost every position on the field—except shortstop, pitcher, and catcher—is a massive asset in today’s game. What many people don’t realize is that this kind of adaptability can be a game-changer, especially for a team looking to maximize roster flexibility.
Shaw’s rookie season was solid, if not spectacular. His .226/.295/.394 batting line wasn’t eye-popping, but it’s important to remember he was just 23 and playing out of position at third base. What’s more, he was a Gold Glove finalist—a detail that I find especially interesting, as it speaks to his defensive prowess despite being thrown into the deep end.
This year, Shaw has shown improvement, hitting .246/.322/.415 in a utility role. From my perspective, this suggests he’s still developing, and there’s every reason to believe he’ll continue to grow. If you take a step back and think about it, Shaw’s trajectory aligns with the kind of player the Cubs could build around for years to come.
The Case for Pedro Ramírez
Pedro Ramírez, on the other hand, is a bit of a wildcard. He doesn’t have Shaw’s pedigree, but he’s been making a strong case for himself this season. What makes this particularly fascinating is his performance in Triple-A Iowa, where he hit .312/.395/.547 with nine home runs and 19 stolen bases in just 43 games. Yes, minor league numbers can be inflated, but his major league performance—a .281/.329/.438 line in 71 plate appearances—suggests he’s the real deal.
Ramírez is also a switch-hitter, which adds a layer of intrigue. In my opinion, switch-hitters often bring a unique dynamic to a lineup, and Ramírez’s ability to make contact could make him a more consistent hitter at the major league level. He’s also two years younger than Shaw, which raises a deeper question: is there more untapped potential here?
The Bigger Picture
Here’s where it gets tricky. Shaw’s versatility and defensive skills make him a safer bet, but Ramírez’s bat and switch-hitting ability could make him the higher-ceiling player. One thing that immediately stands out is how much this decision depends on what the Cubs value more: proven versatility or untapped offensive potential.
What this really suggests is that the Cubs’ decision isn’t just about Shaw or Ramírez—it’s about the team’s identity moving forward. Are they prioritizing flexibility and defense, or are they willing to bet on a younger player with more offensive upside?
My Take
Personally, I think the Cubs should keep Matt Shaw. His versatility and defensive skills are too valuable to pass up, especially in a league where position players are increasingly asked to do more. Yes, Ramírez has shown promise, but Shaw’s track record and adaptability give him the edge in my book.
That said, this is one of those decisions where there’s no wrong answer—just different paths. If the Cubs trade Shaw, they’re betting on Ramírez’s bat and potential. If they trade Ramírez, they’re doubling down on Shaw’s versatility and proven skills.
Final Thoughts
This dilemma is a luxury problem, a testament to the Cubs’ strong farm system and smart drafting. It’s also a reminder of how complex roster construction can be. What many people don’t realize is that these kinds of decisions often come down to intangibles—fit, potential, and the team’s long-term vision.
So, which player would you keep? It’s a question that doesn’t have an easy answer, but it’s one that will shape the Cubs’ future in meaningful ways. And that, in my opinion, is what makes this so fascinating.
